Music and the Global Order Author(S): Martin Stokes Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Music and the Global Order Author(s): Martin Stokes Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 33 (2004), pp. 47-72 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25064845 Accessed: 19/04/2010 03:01 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Anthropology. http://www.jstor.org Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2004. 33:47-72 doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143916 Copyright (c) 2004 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved First published online as a Review inAdvance on April 27, 2004 Music and the Global Order Martin Stokes Music Department, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637; email: mhstokes @ midway, uchicago. edu Key Words globalization, world music, music industry, hybridity, migrancy Abstract Often music is used as a metaphor of global social and cultural pro cesses; it also constitutes an enduring process by and through which people interact across an within and cultures. The review explores these processes with reference to an thropological and ethnomusicological account of globalization that has gathered pace over the last decade. It outlines some of themain ethnographic and historical modes of engagement with persistent neoliberal and other music industry-inspired global myth making (particularly that associated with world music), and argues for an approach to musical globalization that contextualizes those genres, styles, and practices that circulate across cultural borders in specific institutional sites and histories. INTRODUCTION The diverse musics prominent in the mass-mediated spaces of urban Western Europe and North America over the last two decades have challenged habits of thinking about global modernity in terms of westernization, modernization, ur banization, and "cultural gray-out" (Lomax 1968). The critical challenge has been complicated by the more expansive claims emanating from the music industry and music press about world music, anxious, in the late 1980s, to inject energy into record sales and attentive to newly exploitable markets outside their tradi tional zones of operation. World music, according to these claims, testified to a radically new political moment and more equitable cultural relations between the West and the rest. Defining the proper relationship between the critical agenda and the rhetoric of those promoting global music commerce has been a major issue. The problem is not, of course, exclusive to the study of music (see Appadurai 2002, Ferguson 2002, Tsing 2002). Globalization implies notions of change and social transformation. The critical questions have been, For whom, For whose benefit, How, and When? Some re searchers consider such questions within a relatively recent time frame. Small me dia technologies1 permit easy dissemination of and access to previously unknown, *Ifollow Sreberni-Mohamedi's (1994) definition of small media to refer primarily to those posttransistor and postmicrochip technologies that have transformed global media space. 0084-6570/04/1021-0047$14.00 47 48 STOKES remote, or socially exclusive musical styles (Manuel 1993). The accelerated trans national movements of people, capital, commodities, and information energized and crossfertilized music making in the diasporas in the major urban centers of Western Europe and North America and elsewhere (Slobin 2003). The permeabil ity of nationstate borders partially erased by regionalization focused attention on border zones as encounter and creativity sites (Simonett 2001). The approaching (Christian) millennium stimulated musical exchange in (and "as") pilgrimage in anticipation of a dawning new era (Bohlman 1996, 2002). Musical practices her alded general social, political, and epistemic shifts from a modern- to a late- or postmodern order. For others writers, more could be gained by stressing under lying continuities: long histories of musical exchange in colonial and missionary encounter (Bohlman 2003, Radano & Bohlman 2000a); deepening patterns of de pendence on metropolitan markets and tastes inmusic-industry production on the peripheries (Guilbault 1993); the reinscription in new media and its discursive ap paratus of colonial conceptions of otherness and difference (Erlmann 1999; Feld 1994, 2000); processes of musical appropriation that both maintain and disguise Western high-modernist aesthetic hierarchies (Born & Hesmondhalgh 2000a); and the reproduction of the hegemonic relationships between centers and peripheries (Taylor 1997). To tease out shifts in theoretical direction and emphasis in anthropological, ethnomusicological, and other writing on music in the global order is difficult. The period covered in this review (from the late 1980s to 2004) is relatively short. Individual writers, as the paragraph above indicates, can be hard to pin down. Pub lication dates do not relate simply to the circulation and development of ideas in the field. The dynamics of discussion across rigid disciplinary and subdisciplinary boundaries are complex. Some broad shifts can be detected, though. Critical cau tion has replaced the highly polarized theoretical positions and millennial anxieties that previously characterized the field. An interdisciplinary frame of reference pre dominates. Finer-grained historical and ethnographic approaches to global music circulation, with reference to specific genres and sites of intercultural encounter, predominate. Recent scholarly work may be seen as an attempt tomediate some of the sharply opposed viewpoints of the early 1990s, particularly those of Erlmann and Slobin. Erlmann's vision of music in the global order draws partly on Jameson's anal ysis of late capitalism, a system geared, in Jameson's view, toward the orderly production and consumption of difference (Erlmann 1994, 1996, 1999; see also Jameson 1991). His view is also rooted in postcolonial critique, in which a colo nial global imagination symbolically acknowledges the entangled cultural and historical destinies of theWest and the rest, yet mystifies the violently exploita tive relations between the two (Moore-Gilbert 1997). Erlmann points to long-term continuities that date back to the 1870s, in which contemporary world music and world beat can be understood in terms of the colonial contexts in which Euro pean, Black South African, and Black North American musics circulated and crossfertilized. MUSIC AND THE GLOBAL ORDER 49 Erlmann argues that the period between 1870 and 1920, the high point of Euro pean imperial expansion, was a moment of take-off for globalization, after which it took a "single, inexorable form" (Erlmann 1999, p. 15), amode of representation constituting the dominant narrative of modernity. The late nineteenth century, for Erlmann, was characterized by the panaroma, the fetish, and the spectacle, a repre sentational regime defining colonial selves in relation to colonized others inwhich "the lives and thinking of large numbers were beginning to be wholly enclosed, structured, and even governed by the images they had created for themselves" (Erlmann 1999, p. 176). The late twentieth century was, by contrast, characterized by an increasing tendency toward the presentational and the mimetic. First world aesthetic production, as characterized by world music and world beat, came to seek the "real presence" of the Other rather than a represented abstraction, an in timate entanglement of sounds and bodies inmusic and dance underpinned at the ideological level by an "all out relationism" and "empathetic sociality" (Erlmann 1999, p. 177). The signs of crisis are evident, but as Erlmann emphasizes, these are simply the currently visible aspects of a systemic crisis that has been integral to colonial modernity from the outset. Slobin's methods and conclusions stand diametrically opposed (Slobin 1992, 1993). Where Erlmann sees the expanding and totalizing reach of global capital ism, Slobin sees "no overall sense to the system, no hidden agency which controls the flow of culture in a global world" (Slobin 1992, p. 5). He adopts Appadurai's well-known language of "-scapes," exploring the ways in which they articulate particular translocal musical contexts. He develops and nuances a notion of inter acting and mutually defining "sub-," "super-," and "intercultures." Intercultures are further nuanced; Slobin distinguishes "industrial," "diasporic," and "affinity" intercultures, shaped by music industries operating outside of their